hbase-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Asaf Mesika <asaf.mes...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Composing your own timestamp
Date Mon, 09 Jul 2012 17:08:09 GMT
No.
My index is composed of several fields. Some goes to the RowKey, some to the column name,
and some  - and hence the question - to timestamp.
Those that goes to the timestamp are of types Integer, Short and short which together form
8 bytes  - the size of the Timestamp in hbase.

So my question was if that's ok? I mean, it seems that the normal usage for the timestamp
is to have a timestamp (ms since epoch) and to have values there which always increasing -
meaning: you'll never see value 7 enters *before* value 3, for example.

On Jul 9, 2012, at 18:54 PM, Sonal Goyal wrote:

> Sorry I did not understand your question. Are you planning to use the
> concatenated long as the rowkey to your secondary table?
> 
> Best Regards,
> Sonal
> Crux: Reporting for HBase <https://github.com/sonalgoyal/crux>
> Nube Technologies <http://www.nubetech.co>
> 
> <http://in.linkedin.com/in/sonalgoyal>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Asaf Mesika <asaf.mesika@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> We've been tinkering around ideas of implementing secondary index.
>> One of the ideas is based on concatenating three meaningful fields into a
>> long: int, short (2 bytes), short. This long will be used as timestamp when
>> issuing a put to the secondary index table.
>> This means an puts, timestamp wise, will not occur chronologically. since
>> this is not a real timestamp.
>> 
>> Will this create any issues?
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks!
>> 
>> Asaf
>> 
>> 


Mime
View raw message